This is one of the most exciting, daunting and critically important moments in California's education policy history. We are all in uncharted territory. Policymakers and educators at all levels of the system are wrestling with the virtually simultaneous implementation of four radically new and promising policy initiatives: the Common Core State Standards (CCSS); computer adaptive assessments developed by the Smarter Balance Assessment Consortium; the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF); and a new accountability system that focuses on Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) and an evaluation rubric rather than the traditional Academic Performance Index (API) scores. The implementation of these major reforms has redefined the roles and responsibilities of virtually every education actor—from state policymakers to county superintendents to local school boards, teacher, and parents. States across the country are watching to see whether California will succeed in implementing these reforms and how they can replicate parts of what state superintendent Tom Torlakson calls "the California Way."

A new study focuses on the anticipated advantages of charter schools compared to public schools, particularly in terms of teacher autonomy and accountability. While the charter school system was envisioned to provide educators with more freedom and responsibility, this research sought to verify these assumptions. Analyzing teacher survey data, the study found that teachers in charter schools indeed experienced more autonomy than those in public schools. However, there was no significant disparity in how accountable they felt. Interestingly, within the charter school realm, teachers in schools run by Educational Management Organizations (EMOs) reported less autonomy compared to teachers in independent charter schools, with a parallel level of accountability. The research suggests that excessive administrative red tape, especially prevalent in public schools and EMO-run charters, may hinder teacher autonomy. This raises concerns about the accountability aspect of the charter school arrangement and calls for improvements in both sectors. Public schools might benefit from reducing unnecessary administrative burdens to enhance teacher autonomy, while charter schools, especially EMO-run ones, need to address issues hindering teacher independence and accountability fulfillment.

Michael W. Kirst discusses the new federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and the CA overhaul of accountability based on local control of education policy. The federal law requires multiple measures for accountability, including some with state choice. Databases for English learners will change significantly. Federal requirements for teacher evaluation will be deregulated significantly. State assessments are all over the place and will be hard to summarize. California is building an integrated federal/state/local accountability system that includes 23 metrics, primarily for local use in Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAP) that focus on improving budget strategy. Longitudinal data bases from the past will be difficult to integrate with these policy shifts.

A new study examines charter school closures due to financial struggles and explores funding patterns impacting their viability. Analyzing nine years of finance data from California, it compares spending between charter and traditional public schools. Charter schools, receiving 10% less per pupil in revenue, spend 23% less on instruction and 50% less on pupil support services. They allocate less to administrative costs but invest more in consulting services and operations. This suggests cost-saving strategies such as hiring less experienced teachers and employing part-time consultants. While this fiscal flexibility aids financial stability, it raises concerns. Lower spending on essential areas like instruction and support might affect school quality and academic performance. This challenges assumptions about charter schools' autonomy leading to higher spending on instruction. The findings imply a delicate balance between fiscal flexibility and educational quality in charter schools, highlighting potential sustainability concerns if lower spending compromises student outcomes.

Researchers conducted an experiment to determine if incentives could improve low-income students' attendance in tutoring programs provided through Supplemental Education Services (SEdS). Three groups of 5th-8th graders were formed: one offered a $100 reward for regular attendance, another receiving certificates of recognition, and a control group without incentives. Surprisingly, the monetary reward didn't increase attendance, while the certificate group attended 40% more sessions than the control. This contrasts with past studies showing monetary incentives for improved test scores as ineffective, suggesting that mere rewards may not enhance skills without additional support. The certificate approach proved cost-effective, costing $9 per student versus $100 for the monetary incentive. However, wider implementation's effectiveness might diminish due to students' varied perceptions of recognition's value, related to existing academic achievements or repeated rewards. The study's success suggests non-monetary incentives are effective and inexpensive. Policymakers and educators seeking to boost student participation in underutilized programs should consider these findings, emphasizing nuanced research into varying incentives' effectiveness and cost-efficiency to motivate student engagement. Despite these promising results, a comprehensive solution requires a deeper understanding of how different incentives affect diverse student populations and their sustained impact over time.

School districts have adopted the four-day school week to curb budget deficits, particularly in rural regions like Colorado and Wyoming, with around 10 districts in California following suit by 2011. This schedule change raises questions about its impact on academic performance. Longer class periods allow varied teaching methods and teacher planning, possibly improving student morale and behavior. Yet, concerns arise about teacher stress, student retention, and increased fatigue, especially for younger students. Evaluating this shift rigorously is vital, but few studies exist. Using a difference-in-differences regression and data from Colorado’s CSAP, researchers analyzed 4th-grade reading and 5th-grade math scores in districts that switched to a four-day week against those on standard schedules. Over a third of Colorado districts adopted this schedule. The results showed a significant increase in math scores post-switch, and while reading scores also rose, the change wasn’t statistically significant. The findings suggest no harm to student performance and even hint at improved attendance rates, though they apply primarily to smaller, rural districts, warranting caution in applying these findings more broadly.

Education policies often focus on evaluating the effectiveness of interventions without considering their costs. This oversight limits policymakers’ ability to make informed decisions about resource allocation. Understanding intervention costs in relation to their effectiveness is crucial for efficient policymaking. For instance, reducing high school dropout rates, a national priority, could alleviate substantial economic burdens, yet education budgets are limited. Researchers conducted cost-effectiveness analyses on five dropout prevention programs, finding considerable variations in costs and effectiveness. Remedial programs aimed at dropouts were notably more expensive per additional graduate compared to preventative programs, which targeted at-risk students still in school. These findings emphasize the need for cost-effectiveness assessments in educational program evaluations to guide policymaking effectively. Without such analyses, research evidence alone may not provide policymakers with a comprehensive view for decision-making, potentially leading to inefficient resource allocation.

A new survey examines California elementary school officials' awareness of AB-2109, a law tightening personal belief exemptions for school immunizations. Findings revealed limited understanding among respondents, with low awareness and knowledge of the law's details. Only health workers showed better comprehension. Despite this, schools planned to communicate the requirements to parents. Yet, officials highlighted the need for more staff education, district guidance, and support materials. The survey emphasizes the necessity of further information dissemination about AB-2109 to all school staff involved in implementing immunization policies, from enrollment to parent interaction, to ensure effective compliance.

The KIPP network of charter schools aims to enhance academic outcomes for low-income students through rigorous standards and increased classroom time. Mathematica Policy Research conducted a study assessing KIPP's impact, accounting for the differences between students who chose KIPP and those who didn't. Analyzing 41 KIPP middle schools over a decade, they found that students in these schools demonstrated substantial growth in reading and math, equating to 90% of an extra year of math and two-thirds of a year in reading compared to their non-KIPP peers. These positive effects were consistent across most schools and extended to other subjects and low-stakes assessments. Even when employing random admissions lotteries, the impact remained significant. The reasons behind KIPP's success remain ambiguous—whether it's due to instructional strategies, drawing students from underperforming schools, or positive peer effects remains uncertain. Further research is needed to decipher these causes and determine if KIPP's methods could be broadly applicable to improve student achievement in public schools, potentially prompting the adoption of their successful practices in traditional public schools or expanding successful charter networks.

School reform emphasizes transferring decision-making power to individual schools, seen in districts like San Francisco, Los Angeles, and beyond California. Principals gain control over budgets, curricula, schedules, and professional development, aiming to enhance student learning. Yet, the impact of this decentralization on school performance remains largely unknown. In Chicago, a study of an autonomy program revealed increased reading proficiency among elementary students after two years, but no significant gains in math or overall achievement scores. Principals leaned toward autonomy in budgets and curricula. Policy suggestions arise: policymakers must allow time for schools to adapt to autonomy, understanding improvements might not be immediate. They should also avoid neglecting high- or low-achieving students in pursuit of proficiency rates, affecting school evaluations. Further research is crucial to understand how decentralized control affects academic performance, examining how school leaders leverage autonomy to assess its potential for improving schools.

Proponents support school choice to enhance education, but research often overlooks its impact on school practices and achievement. A new study delves into whether charter school proximity influences school practices and its relation to math and reading achievement using Early Childhood Longitudinal Study data. Results show minimal impact on school practices based on charter proximity. Closer schools reported lower teacher absenteeism and better-aligned instruction, yet these changes did not remarkably affect reading or math achievement. Contrary to beliefs, charter growth does not appear to prompt organizational shifts in public schools due to entrenched cultural norms. Similarities between charter and public schools overshadow differences, hindering learning exchanges. Moreover, charters in disadvantaged areas may lack resources to impact public school competition. This study questions the efficacy of market-driven approaches in addressing educational challenges. Understanding the connection between competition, school practices, and student achievement is vital for directing policy initiatives effectively.

Access to arts education in US public schools varies greatly and remains largely undocumented. The President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities highlighted this lack of data on offered courses, hindering policymakers' understanding. A recent study in Texas with data from 870 public high schools aimed to illustrate this variation by developing indices measuring arts education access. Surprisingly, schools with numerous arts courses didn’t always have high student engagement, and high participation rates often lacked diverse courses. Researchers suggest policymakers consider both course offerings and student engagement rates to accurately identify exceptional arts programs.Recommendations propose creating indices combining course offerings and participation rates in other states to address equity and ensure sufficient arts opportunities in public high schools. Additionally, California policymakers are urged to use their education databases, like the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System, to document arts education access. Furthermore, researchers propose a dialogue among educators, practitioners, and policymakers to define what constitutes an arts-rich school. Establishing standardized thresholds for course offerings and participation rates can ensure a more comprehensive understanding of arts education access. While incomplete, descriptions of course offerings and participation rates are crucial first steps toward understanding arts education access.

The concern over charter schools potentially excluding low-performing students has sparked debate. Analyzing a major urban district's data, researchers studied exit patterns suggesting such exclusions. Explicit evidence of schools expelling low-performing students is hard to find. Subtle methods like counseling or strict disciplinary actions might influence exits. While research is unable to confirm reasons for student transfers, data analysis did not support the claim that charter schools push out low-performing students more than traditional public schools. The study also found exiting charter students had lower performance, similar to those leaving traditional public schools. Analytical analyses, considering student characteristics, did not show evidence supporting the notion that charter schools disproportionately expel low-performing students. While findings counter the claim within our district, they are not conclusive for all settings. Variations may exist elsewhere. The researchers advocate for evidence-based discussions around charter schools, stressing the need for empirical backing before making or accepting claims about their student retention practices.

A new study assessed the effectiveness of after-school tutoring programs, specifically the Supplemental Educational Services (SES) under No Child Left Behind (NCLB), within Chicago Public Schools. Evaluating these SES providers from 2009 onwards, the research aimed to fairly measure their impact on student achievement by considering student characteristics and school settings. The findings indicated that participating in SES positively influenced student achievement, notably with over 40 hours of tutoring, contributing significantly to annual student gains. Interestingly, there was a decline in hourly rates among providers over time, which correlated with the district's program, and a clear link between provider effectiveness and the number of students served. Successful program attributes, such as effective oversight, coordination, and cost reduction, were identified and could be beneficial for other districts. The strategies developed could be adopted by districts to assess provider effectiveness and provide crucial information to parents, aiding informed decisions. This valuable data could guide California districts granted NCLB waivers in program development and accountability system design. Similar analyses are underway in the Los Angeles Unified School District, highlighting the broader potential application of these findings.

States moved from assessing students' proficiency to using growth models to track academic progress. Researchers analyzed three growth models in a California district, finding more prediction errors for English learners (ELs) than non-ELs. The models often misjudged ELs as remaining non-proficient by 7th grade when they were proficient. This error was more frequent for ELs (16–28%) than non-ELs (13–17%). ELs' steeper learning trajectories might explain this discrepancy; their growth is faster despite early low scores due to language support needs. These model inaccuracies have policy implications, potentially causing unnecessary interventions and not crediting effective instruction in early grades. They could influence the selection of accountability models, especially for student subgroups. Although California hasn't implemented growth-based accountability, it's part of the Smarter Balanced Assessment plans. Notably, the LA Times used a growth model to evaluate teachers, a contentious practice in education due to concerns about validity. The study's evidence questions any model's validity assuming uniform student growth without considering a teacher's student demographics.

Year-round school calendars, widely adopted in California due to school crowding, aim to evenly distribute school days. Multi-track calendars, seen as cost-saving, accommodate larger student bodies. There is a belief that redistributing summer breaks could counteract summer learning loss, particularly for disadvantaged students. Research highlights caution regarding year-round schooling. While cost savings are clear, academic gains haven't materialized, impacting high-risk student groups negatively. California showed notably negative effects compared to neutral outcomes in Wake County, North Carolina, where multi-track calendars were used widely. This disparity emphasizes considering demographics; schools with substantial minority or low-income populations may face different challenges. The findings caution policymakers against risking student achievement solely for minor savings. Tailored approaches for schools based on their demographics are suggested. The academic benefits of year-round schooling remain scarce, except for addressing severe overcrowding. Yet, amid tightening budgets, year-round schools are cautiously endorsed as a financial reform, urging further examination and context-specific considerations in policymaking.

This commentary, part of a broader PACE series exploring school finance, speaks to challenges faced by California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The two biggest problems with the California financial system are inequitable revenue allocations and inefficiencies caused by categorical restrictions. Governor Brown's proposal addresses these issues, but critics argue that the system still has other problems. One major criticism is that there are winners and losers in the system. Under Brown's proposal, the allocations for some districts will look drastically different, with some receiving less than others. This is because current allocations have little connection to the costs of educating students and the characteristics of students and schools. Another alternative is to raise the base so everybody "wins," which would provide more flexibility and a more correlated revenue with costs. However, this system still creates winners and losers because allocations would not be as tightly connected to costs as under the current system. Governor Brown's proposal nevertheless helps solve the two biggest problems with California's school finance system and offers a better alternative to the current financial system.

The Urban School Leaders (USL) program at California State University Dominguez Hills, backed by a five-year federal grant, embodies a partnership between LAUSD districts and the university. Its goal is to prepare leaders for high-needs schools, enhance staff development, and foster student achievement. Adapting to students' needs and the evolving demands on schools has prompted ongoing reflections and changes within the program. Continual adjustments maintain curriculum rigor while integrating theoretical knowledge with practical experiences. The program's evolution is a collaborative effort involving curriculum review, aligning with standards, and emphasizing research-based practices. Forming and nurturing partnerships with school districts necessitates time, flexibility, and creativity, ensuring meaningful dialogues among stakeholders to address LAUSD's student needs. This ongoing learning process emphasizes the importance of active experiences and reflective learning for educational leaders. The success of the program holds promise for policy implications, establishing a new paradigm in leader development, emphasizing ongoing university-district partnerships, transforming urban communities, and embedding research as a regular practice within educational settings. This model foresees universities becoming hubs for continual development, fostering a transformed educational landscape by nurturing stable communities and promoting ongoing research-driven improvements.

California's education funding system, laden with layered regulations akin to geological strata, restricts innovation and flexibility. Governor Jerry Brown's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) proposes a significant overhaul, consolidating scattered funds into a flexible per-pupil grant. This reform aims to empower educators by freeing them from rigid spending rules, shifting focus from compliance to achieving student goals. Additionally, the plan directs extra resources to schools supporting disadvantaged students, offering supplementary aid based on the level of need. Notably, the proposal doesn't reduce funding but allocates more to districts facing greater challenges. The reformation aspires to create a fairer, more efficient, and innovative education finance system, paving the way for a more promising educational landscape in California.

Charter schools have evolved, now aiming to influence traditional districts. Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) are gaining attention as vehicles for reform. In a study of 25 CMOs, factors impacting their growth were analyzed. Positive influences included charter-friendly state policies and local resources like facilities and staff. However, limited funding and strained relations with authorizers restricted growth. State legislation, particularly charter caps and the chartering process, heavily affected CMOs. For California CMOs, the state charter cap and appeal rights enabled scale-up, while funding and facilities posed challenges. Policymakers face questions about facilitating CMO scale-up through state and local policies, treating high-performing CMOs differently during oversight, and supporting CMOs replicating models across state lines. The role of state policies in regulating and aiding high-quality CMOs seeking expansion remains a key consideration.

Educational technology has often fallen short of expectations, but the Internet's emergence could revolutionize learning. It enables individualized learning, tailoring pace and style to students. Adaptive software makes learning smarter, offering support and challenges. Moreover, it reshapes the rigid educational hierarchy into an open network. Despite technology's advancement, policy struggles persist. While development continues, California’s educational model remains antiquated. Strategic policies could shift this landscape. Supporting tech applications in key areas like English Language Learning or Special Education promises significant returns. Deregulation, while not wholesale, could unlock potential by allowing online courses statewide, shifting from seat time-based credit, and introducing the California Diploma. Rather than a single virtual school, a network, Learning 2.0.net, offers diverse resources. It divides into information, learning, and credit systems. It illuminates educational pathways, aggregates quality learning materials, and allows test-based credits, challenging conventional classroom constraints. Internet technology's potential upheaval mandates a transformative educational adaptation. While policy can't control technology’s spread, it can guide its integration, fostering a paradigm shift in public education.

Elementary teachers often feel time-strapped due to high-stakes testing and curricular demands, leading to reduced focus on social studies. In states mandating social studies assessments, teachers allocate roughly 30 extra minutes weekly to social studies compared to non-testing states. Moreover, teachers perceiving more control over their teaching dedicate up to 6 additional hours to social studies. Surprisingly, factors like teacher credentials and school demographics had minimal impact on social studies teaching time. These findings emphasize the link between mandated tests, teacher autonomy, and social studies instruction. Advocating for social studies inclusion in standardized testing, while prioritizing teacher autonomy, is suggested to balance subject emphasis. Encouraging educators' independence might enhance social studies teaching despite test-centric pressures. A new study urges educational leaders to reshape policies, fostering both teacher autonomy and acknowledgment of social studies' importance within the accountability framework.

The challenges faced by California school districts are complex, demanding leaders to navigate diverse educational philosophies and implement explicit equity-oriented policies. A study on an urban California district revealed that, beyond technical issues, ideological differences among leaders, teachers, and principals can compromise the development of ambitious, equity-oriented instructional policies. Embracing political trends, influenced by federal policies like No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top, may narrow the educational focus to economic goals, emphasizing standardized testing and basic skills. This shift detracts from broader academic objectives, such as fostering community engagement and critical thinking. A new study underscores the significant role of ideology in shaping district instructional policies and highlights the potential consequences of aligning with political trends that perpetuate educational inequities for historically underserved communities. Ultimately, the findings illustrate how societal and institutional trends can intensify existing disparities by promoting policies that prioritize narrow economic purposes of schooling over holistic educational goals.

California voters express widespread concern about the state of their schools, with 42% giving schools a grade of D or F, and 57% believing they have deteriorated in recent years. The inadequacy of school funding is acknowledged, with over 40% rating state efforts poorly on a 10-point scale. Evidence from the PACE/USC Rossier Voter Poll reveals bipartisan skepticism about school funding, with Democrats slightly more optimistic. However, challenges loom for two funding initiatives on the November ballot. Despite recognition of funding issues, voters harbor deep skepticism about the state's ability to use resources efficiently, posing a significant political hurdle. The poll indicates voters' persistent doubt about the state's trustworthiness in spending money wisely, presenting a challenge for advocates of increased educational spending. The divisive debate among supporters of different funding propositions further complicates matters, potentially leading to the failure of both initiatives and significant consequences for the state's education system. Despite concerns about schools and acknowledgment of the need for more funding, voters appear skeptical about the achievability of educational improvement, posing a potential challenge for initiatives in the November elections.